Introduction to vibration

 Theory of vibration
o Mechanical aVibrations – text book
 Vibrations of Structures
o Random Excitation of Structures
o Free Vibrations
o Forced Vibrations
 Basic equations for 1 DOF, 2 DOF, multi DOF systems
 Damping and stiffness
 Signal analysis
o PSD study, spectral analysis, FFT – Mechanical aVibrations- text book - chapter 2
 Time data analysis
o Noise and vibration analysis - text book
 Sine vibration tests
o Mechanical aVibrations – text book chapter 4
 Chapter 10 nonlinear dynamics text book
 Chapter 4 and 5 in Nonlinear Vibration with Control
 About contact impact – paper Contact-impact analysis in multibody systems based on the
nonsmooth dynamics approach
 A continuous force model for the impact analysis of
flexible multibody systems aa shabana
 Nonlinear (Dynamic) Vibration Analysis of a Hydraulic Brake Unit
1. Introduction
1.1. Shock and vibration terminology
1.2. Testing methods
1.2.1. Hammer Test
1.2.2. Shaker Test
1.3. Spectral density of Power
1.4. Rigid and Flexible Body
2. Aims of the research
3. Multi-body system dynamics
3.1. Equations of motion for multibody systems formulation
3.2. Contact forces in Dynamic Equations
3.2.1. Linear analysis
3.2.1.1. Pure Elastic Contact Force Model
3.2.1.2. Dissipative contact force model
3.2.2. Nonlinear analysis
3.2.2.1. Pure Elastic Contact Force Model
3.2.2.2. Dissipative contact force model
4. Software Packages
4.1. Simpack
4.2. Imc Famos
4.3. FEM Tools
5. Analysis of the Brake unit, design and its basic working principle
5.1. Structural Features
5.2. Working Principle
6. Modeling in SIMPACK
6.1. Topology of the model
6.2. Physical Parameters for the model
6.3. Importing geometries from ANSYS
6.4. Linear model
6.5. Nonlinear model
7. Simulation and automation
7.1. Simulation setup
7.1.1. Simpack
7.1.2. Shaker test
7.1.3. Hammer test
7.2. Automation of Simpack simulations
8. Experimental data Analysis and Verification
8.1. Analysis of Shaker Test results
8.2. Analysis of Hammer Test
8.3. Comparison of experimental results with simulation results
8.4. Influence of parameter changes on simulation results
9. Conclusion and Future Scope
10. Bibliography
Flexible Multibody Systems with Impact
The impact excitations are always accompanied by the redistribution of the system’s total
momentum, thus causing impulsive motions in the system’s dynamic behavior. The resulting
impulsive forces areknown to excite higher modes of vibration, causing them to pickup a higher
proportion of the total system energy. In addition togenerating high stress levels at different joints
of the mechanical system, the impulsive forces give rise to high-frequency transientmotions.
Accordingly, the system’s eigenspectrum spans a widefrequency range, which imposes additional
burdens on the numer-ical integration scheme due to the manipulation of a numericallystiff
system [112]. In such a case, the integration algorithm forcesa sufficiently small step-size
(commonly on the order of one-tenththe time period of the highest frequency) in order to capture
thefast dynamics of the system. As a consequence, the numericalintegration is rendered
inefficient when integrating for severalcycles of the slow dynamics, and may even fail to
converge to thesolution.Model reduction techniques are invoked to alleviate the prob-lem of large
dimensionality, thus reducing the size of the fre-quency spectrum. For instance, the efficient
modal reductiontechnique was often employed to obtain a reduced order model[36]. To this end,
a subset of eigenvectors, which span the fre-quency spectrum of the forcing function, is retained
as significantmodes. These modes, in general, consist of the lower frequencysubsystem along
with any higher modes that are candidates for ex-citation by the external forces. Yet, the
problematic decision ofhow the basis of the modal space is selected remains to beaddressed, in
order to preserve the fidelity of the reduced ordermodel in capturing all of the significant impact-
induced high-fre-quency excitations. If the basis of the modal space is properlyselected, the
resulting reduced model is one with a compact fre-quency spectrum, thus enhancing the
efficiency of the numericalsolution without jeopardizing the accuracy of the dynamic
model.Another numerical difficulty is related to the description of thecontact surface in terms of
the generalized elastic coordinates andwhether the physical (nodal) or distributed (modal)
coordinatesare described. If the finite element method is used, the mesh dis-cretization is
normally performed at a preprocessing stage to thedynamic simulation. Accordingly, the contact
zones need to beidentified a priori in order to invoke a highly desired finer mesh atcontact for
preserving numerical accuracy.Further numerical challenges exist in the case of flexible multi-
body systems with impulsive constraints. Examples are availablein systems with changeable
kinematic structure when representedby reduced order models. If a modal reduction is used, it
willimpose an additional computational difficulty in the numericalsimulation, since the modal
characteristics of the elastic compo-nents are evaluated in a preprocessing stage before starting
the dy-namics simulation. Yet, a change in kinematic structure (i.e.,change in the nature of the
bilateral constraints), would require asubsequent change in the basis of the modal space.
Therefore, thefinite element processor will be called upon to update the dynamiccharacteristics of
the elastic components whenever a change intheir kinematic structure or a significant change in
their rotationalspeed is encountered. The interface between pre-event and post-event modal bases
is an undertaking of considerable numericalintricacy.Another numerical problem is related to the
finite element dis-cretization and dispersion of waves in elastic solids. The simplestform of wave
propagation is thenondispersivewave. A nondisper-sive wave is one which travels at a fixed
speed through the me-dium without a change in shape [90]. Physical systems
whichapproximately obey this condition are longitudinal waves in a uni-form bar, torsional
waves in a uniform bar, and small-amplitudewaves in a stretched string [90]. However, bending,
or lateral,waves in a bar are dispersive so that the shape of a transversewave will be continually
changing. This corresponds to differentwavelengths traveling at different speeds, thus there is no
fixedspeed of propagation. In this regard, the issue of numerical effi-ciency using spectral finite
element formulations [113] and the nu-merical dispersion of two-dimensional finite elements
[114] needsto be addressed within the context of flexible multibody systemswith impact

Modeling of Impact in Multibody Systems: An Overview. Available from:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235708326_Modeling_of_Impact_in_Multibody_Syste
ms_An_Overview [accessed Jul 05 2018].

CHAPTER-4
4. Software Packages
Starting from modelling, simulation to analysis various software’s had been used to carry out my
work successfully. SIMPACK for modelling and simulation; FEM Tools for finding eigen values
and mode shapes; imc FAMOS for l data analysis from shaker test results.
4.1 SIMPACK 9.9.1
4.2 FEM Tools
4.3 imc FAMOS
imc FAMOS (Fast Analysis and Monitoring of Signals) is a software program for analysis and
evaluation of measurement results. With an extensive range of functions conceived especially for
the needs of measurement and control applications, imc FAMOS eliminates much of your routine
work in a comfortable fashion.
With imc FAMOS, you can process large data sets quickly and efficiently and create
computational procedures using standard mathematical notation. No specialized programming
expertise is required! Furthermore, imc FAMOS offers powerful means for displaying your data
in charts or tables and for printing these in individually designed reports.

CHAPTER - 8
8. Experimental data Analysis and Verification
The Hydraulic brake part is subjected to different tests in the lab and the results obtained are
analyzed to understand the model behavior. The results obtained are used for comparison to
results from Simpack simulations.
8.1. Analysis of Shaker Test results
8.2. Analysis of Hammer Test
8.3. Comparison of experimental results with simulation results